387 replies to this topic

[Kartr]

Brilig I believe it is engine size that affects convergence speed (I know its supposed to affect torso twist). Otherwise I think people are just saying (and rightly so) that your movement would/should affect your accuracy.

[Tennex]

if you are refering to divergence and convergence.

its called vergence

since when you say converge i assume you also mean, when the mech's weapon's diverge on a further enemy (since PPC/sniper weapons are dominant, this is the case most of the time).

[DocBach]

Convergence would have a maximum based on he movement of the mech and being in range, speed of convergence would be affected by heat and target speed. It doesn't make ppcs less potent, just spreads the damage of all group fire.

Edited by DocBach, 26 June 2013 - 07:42 PM.

[Inhibition]

DocBach, on 25 June 2013 - 07:27 AM, said:

Overview:

The largest problem in this game stems from the fact that PGI has kept certain traits and rules from the board game such as the separate location damage models, then added the ability to group several weapons together and shoot them all at one location. These damage models were balanced for a board game in which weapons hit completely random locations

Convergence should not, and need not be nerfed. Your poll implies that
there is something that should nerf convergence, and nothing should nerf convergence.

Nerfing convergence will just ruin the game not only for the large alpha striking mechs, but
for ALL mechs. Nerfing convergence will just STRIP THE GAME OF ANY MAINSTREAM POTENTIAL
and launch the game into a period of crass playstyle catered to only 30+ year old's.

I'm younger than 20 (won't divulge my age), and I've tried introducing this game to young
mainstream gamers. The people I got going in this game think all this
hype and crying about nerfing alpha striking, convergence, etc. are not in the same
era of gaming. That speaks for itself...

In addition,
even though the game is fueled by many TT players, MWO will never
achieve widespread success if its players forcefully try to implement TT influences like
finding a way to nerf convergence

Edited by Inhibition, 26 June 2013 - 07:24 PM.

[Lightfoot]

Random Dice rolls are one of the things that can't be transferred from the board game into a sim-shooter.

If you Alpha-Strike on a moving mech, the different weapons will spread into a cone pattern based on lateral speed of the mech. That is why you always keep lateral movement to the opposing force. You get alot of automatic protections from doing so including, protection from the Alpha-Strike. But that is your responsability as a pilot. It shouldn't be an auto-guardian system.

Mechs boating one weapon are not as powerful as those with a balanced loadout. MWO just doesn't have a hard heat cap that kills so players are abusing energy boats. That's not an Alpha-Strike issue.

When I want the Alpha-Strike to work is when a mech is coming for the kill, going straight at me, thinking they have the upper hand with their armor and loadout. Also when mechs shutdown for boating whatever, they should not get the free pass that the OP is suggesting. Payback for stupid boating is, the Alpha-Strike. Preferably the Alpha through the cockpit.

The Alpha-Strike is iconic MechWarrior gameplay. Let's nerf it, okay?

Edited by Lightfoot, 26 June 2013 - 07:35 PM.

[Unbound Inferno]

Inhibition, on 26 June 2013 - 07:23 PM, said:

Convergence should not, and need not be nerfed. Your poll implies that
there is something that should nerf convergence, and nothing should nerf convergence.

Nerfing convergence will just ruin the game not only for the large alpha striking mechs, but
for ALL mechs. Nerfing convergence will just STRIP THE GAME OF ANY MAINSTREAM POTENTIAL
and launch the game into a period of crass playstyle catered to only 30+ year old's.

I'm younger than 20 (won't divulge my age), and I've tried introducing this game to young
mainstream gamers. The people I got going in this game think all this
hype and crying about nerfing alpha striking, convergence, etc. are not in the same
era of gaming. That speaks for itself...

In addition,
even though the game is fueled by many TT players, MWO will never
achieve widespread success if its players forcefully try to implement TT influences like
finding a way to nerf convergence

We are using TT values for weapon damage as the base numbers.

The original Armor numbers were off the old TT values.

Armor got DOUBLED because the FPS convergence caused too much damage.
Old TT rules have a dice randomization for hits, so you never had pinpoint accuracy - which the numbers were from.


IF we are going to continue using the old TT numbers, we need to address convergence which IS an issue here. Denial won't change the fact that the numbers based off a system that relied on inaccuracy is causing problems when we are accurate.

[Kartr]

And for all those people who say "this isn't table top any more you can't use that stuff" Table Top is pretty much just percentile based which is what the targeting circles like in Mass Effect or World of Tanks do.

Example: since its already been brought up C3. In table top if you have a C3 network all the 'Mechs in it get to use the range modifiers for the unit closest to the target. If I'm shooting a PPC at 480m (16 hexes) or long range I have to add a +4 to whatever I roll on top of everything else, but if I have a friendly 'Mech in the C3 network that is within 180m (6 hexes) or short range for a PPC I get to use the short range modifier of +0. So when C3 is implemented under a WoT style reticle, the sights would decrease in area by 33% in that situation.

Another example: movement adds a +1 for walking and a +2 for running with a +3 for jumping. That's an increase in area of ~8%, ~17% and 25%.

As for the age gap I am 26 and I would like a system that uses a reticle like World of Tanks and has your weapons with a fixed convergence (because that's really what it is). As for it killing its popularity, World of Tanks uses a system like we are describing and it is so popular MWO is patterned off it!

[DocBach]

Lightfoot, on 26 June 2013 - 07:35 PM, said:

If you Alpha-Strike on a moving mech, the different weapons will spread into a cone pattern based on lateral speed of the mech. That is why you always keep lateral movement to the opposing force. You get alot of automatic protections from doing so including, protection from the Alpha-Strike. But that is your responsability as a pilot. It shouldn't be an auto-guardian system

.

Actually, the weapons in this game besides missiles or DOT lasers will hit one location and not spread out. that's the problem. Thats why you see PPC's dominating the competitive circuit.

Lightfoot, on 26 June 2013 - 07:35 PM, said:

Mechs boating one weapon are not as powerful as those with a balanced loadout. MWO just doesn't have a hard heat cap that kills so players are abusing energy boats. That's not an Alpha-Strike issue.

When I want the Alpha-Strike to work is when a mech is coming for the kill, going straight at me, thinking they have the upper hand with their armor and loadout. Also when mechs shutdown for boating whatever, they should not get the free pass that the OP is suggesting. Payback for stupid boating is, the Alpha-Strike. Preferably the Alpha through the cockpit.

The Alpha-Strike is iconic MechWarrior gameplay. Let's nerf it, okay?

alpha strikes are suppose to be iconic of a last resort all out action in the lore - not the standard attack in which everyone does repeatedly with no repercussion. You alpha strike for that one last shot at a killing blow before you get done in - you don't alpha strike with every left mouse click.

The problem with high damage alpha strike gameplay will become even more apparent when clan tech hits the scene - clan weapons are lighter and do more damage -- the Clan equivalent to the ER PPC weighs 6 tons and does 15 damage, the same as a Gauss rifle - the Clan version of the PPC stalker could do 90 damage of pinpoint alpha - that's enough to one shot pretty much any 'Mech 65 tons or lighter.

I don't understand what free pass you are talking about - in my system a shut down 'Mech would be penalized in two ways: First, as convergence speed is based on the speed of the target, your weapons would converge on a shut down mech rapidly. Secondly, when that 'Mech powered back up, his weapons would converge more slowly to penalize him for high heat.

Edited by DocBach, 26 June 2013 - 09:51 PM.

[DocBach]

Inhibition, on 26 June 2013 - 07:23 PM, said:

Nerfing convergence will just ruin the game not only for the large alpha striking mechs, but
for ALL mechs. Nerfing convergence will just STRIP THE GAME OF ANY MAINSTREAM POTENTIAL
and launch the game into a period of crass playstyle catered to only 30+ year old's.

By opening up alpha strike damage you'd increase the survivability of 'Mechs - this game is suppose to simulate battle between gigantic kings of battle that are suppose to take extreme punishment, not tin men who crumple from a single hit. Currently 'Mechs under 50 tons can be dispatched in a single shot - easily. This will be even worse when Clan tech arrives in the upcoming months. Something in the system needs to change, and soon. In the NGNG interview with Russ today he said PGI recognizes this and when Paul returns from vacation they're going to discuss ways to bring that feeling back to MechWarrior.

If we're going to have standard and hardcore mode sets, perhaps they can keep the easy, quick twitch, fire everything with one click into a single hole the mainstream player wants in a game in the standard mode -- but give us who want something more a game with more depth in the hardcore mode. This leaves both kinds of players happy, and opens maximum revenue through player base to PGI.

Edited by DocBach, 27 June 2013 - 06:45 AM.

[MustrumRidcully]

jakucha, on 25 June 2013 - 04:23 PM, said:

I just say bring on the test server. Would be willing to try alternate convergence settings there.

AFAIK, the test server might not be used that much for balance stuff. Wasn't one of the things they mentioned testing 3PV?

I was suddenly a lot less enthusiastic about the test servers when I read that.

[Foxfire]

Taemien, on 26 June 2013 - 04:48 PM, said:

This is a mech that needs high alpha (compared to its weight) to even survive. Spider and to a lesser extent the Cicada are the same way as well as the future Flea and Locust.

I disagree with this. I've piloted Jenners since closed beta. I split my weapons into groups of two weapons each and don't alpha them. I am much better with this set up because I can maintain a steadier level of fire, can manage heat better, and am not punished near as much for mistimed shots.

[DocBach]

Foxfire, on 27 June 2013 - 01:53 AM, said:

I disagree with this. I've piloted Jenners since closed beta. I split my weapons into groups of two weapons each and don't alpha them. I am much better with this set up because I can maintain a steadier level of fire, can manage heat better, and am not punished near as much for mistimed shots.

What I don't understand is if all 'Mechs have their damage spread, how does it only affect light 'mechs, who also receive a bonus in which enemy convergence speed against them is slowed the faster they move?

Perhaps the Locust wouldn't be the king of battle and would take longer trying to one-on-one an Atlas, but is that really suppose to be the Locust's role?

[Whompity]

How can a torso mounted gauss rifle "converge" at all? Magic?

Edited by Olivia Maybach, 27 June 2013 - 06:58 AM.

[DocBach]

I always imagined weapons in the torsos to be mounted on actuators that could move sort of like old WWI tanks, but you know, high tech and sci fi retro futuristically.

[Whompity]

DocBach, on 27 June 2013 - 07:00 AM, said:

I always imagined weapons in the torsos to be mounted on actuators that could move sort of like old WWI tanks, but you know, high tech and sci fi retro futuristically.

I dunno... the models don't seem to have that kind of mount. The barrel protrusion on all of the ballistic mounts I've seen seem to indicate that the largest mass of the weapon is inside the mech and doesn't pivot at the surface. Look at the Phract 2X or Atlas, for example.

If they did pivot, the amount would be miniscule.

Edited by Olivia Maybach, 27 June 2013 - 07:03 AM.

[DocBach]

shooting adjustments are angular - adjustments needed to move the point of impact need to be only very slight for the short ranges that we are shooting at in this game. They wouldn't need to move the barrel very much at all.

[8RoundsRapid]

WarZ, on 26 June 2013 - 06:12 PM, said:

You have to come to the understanding that this is NOT table top. Its a video game. In real time.

At this point, saying this hurts your argument alot more than it supports it.

Inhibition, on 26 June 2013 - 07:23 PM, said:

I'm younger than 20...

...MWO will never achieve widespread success if its players forcefully try to implement TT influences like
finding a way to nerf convergence

Well arent you the child prodigy? It's amazing to me you didn't graduate from University at the age of 12 with this kind of insight into the world and how it works, son.

You two nitwits do realize that MWO is based (or supposed to be) on a game that has been around for ~30 years and has millions and millions of followers/players around the world, right? How many does alpha warrior online have?

Edited by 8RoundsRapid, 27 June 2013 - 07:12 AM.

[Whompity]

DocBach, on 27 June 2013 - 07:06 AM, said:

shooting adjustments are angular - adjustments needed to move the point of impact need to be only very slight for the short ranges that we are shooting at in this game. They wouldn't need to move the barrel very much at all.

Only slight at LONG range. Impossible at short, I believe. I think we're probably debating different forms of "kludge" to make this all look right, but I think the fixed mount torso weapons would fix ALL convergence issues AND add a bit of difficulty at the same time. It'd mean a LOT less alphas, as they'd spread the damage around (size of spread depends on the weapon spacing on the firing platform) which would lead people to chain fire and adjust between shots a lot more. A true alpha becomes a bit of a mech-sized shotgun.

Edited by Olivia Maybach, 27 June 2013 - 07:13 AM.

[JokerVictor]

Seriously nice OP, I love all your ideas. If the OP's idea (or Homeless Bill's) were implemented, and a revamp of the heat system went into effect. I would gladly start playing again.

As it stands I have no reason to suffer the current meta, at all.

[DocBach]

Olivia Maybach, on 27 June 2013 - 07:12 AM, said:

Only slight at LONG range. Impossible at short, I believe. I think we're probably debating different forms of "kludge" to make this all look right, but I think the fixed mount torso weapons would fix ALL convergence issues AND add a bit of difficulty at the same time. It'd mean a LOT less alphas, as they'd spread the damage around (size of spread depends on the weapon spacing on the firing platform) which would lead people to chain fire and adjust between shots a lot more. A true alpha becomes a bit of a mech-sized shotgun.

Shooting adjustments are angular the closer the target is, the less of an angle you have to adjust. So even slighter adjustments for short range, actually. And since shooting at ranges is angular adjustments, having fixed convergence would make the game pretty much impossible to hit anything that isn't standing still in front of you.

This system pretty much allows maximum convergence only if the pilot sacrifices speed and the enemy presents himself as an easy target - maximum convergence would not be possible while moving or at extreme ranges. Alpha strikes would still be spread across the target, only now the pilot would have a consistent visual reference to where his firepower would go, rather than have to guess and kentucky windage for each shot.

Edited by DocBach, 27 June 2013 - 07:33 AM.